Plugin Piracy Thread

Hey guys, I’ve got a Windows XP machine that won’t install the current version of Illustrator. Should I A. pirate a copy from 2005, or B. enter the 2020’s by buying a new laptop?
bart simpson GIF
 
Not quite the example I gave...

Adobe stole from me...
1) A working Illustrator version I paid for that they could easily have kept online, IMO (it did not have server interaction, AFAIK)
2) They kinda steal my money cos ideally I have to buy a plugin update to be able to work again
3) They steal my credibility as one of the major A(dobe)-holes there denies what happened to me...
4) They continually and majorly steal everyone's time by hardly fixing bugs.
5) Instead they are dumbing everything down so everyone can be lured into subbing while pros are left in the cold...

When I was still on the forums 3 years ago I saw plenty raging people all the time.

YEAP -- at this point I will advise everyone to steal from Adobe as much as they can! :cool:
This explains so much 🤣

I think if you showed this post to 100 people, 99 of them would laugh at it and say you’re wrong. I’m not here to change your mind but maybe just zoom back and look at what you’re actually saying here.
 
This explains so much 🤣

I think if you showed this post to 100 people, 99 of them would laugh at it and say you’re wrong. I’m not here to change your mind but maybe just zoom back and look at what you’re actually saying here.
Yeah, he's IMO pretty shady. But, I don't know him IRL, so that's a good thing.
 
I don't pirate. I don't condone piracy.

That said, the business world created this situation by nibbling away at the concept of ownership. Paying for a "license" to something isn't the same as paying for the actual item. If I pay for something, I should be able to do whatever the fuck I want with it. I should be able to resell my instance of it, without limits. I should be able to use it in perpetuity. I should be able to repair without hinderance if I have the smarts to. If it is a software product, the provider of the operating system (Apple, this means you) shouldn't be able to make it disappear at a whim. If it's media (books, audio, video), it should never be subject to modification or censorship after purchase (Amazon, this means you).

Big business made this bed, and they'll have to lie in it. Again: I don't pirate. I don't condone piracy.

...but I completely understand how piracy became mainstream.
 
I don't pirate. I don't condone piracy.

That said, the business world created this situation by nibbling away at the concept of ownership. Paying for a "license" to something isn't the same as paying for the actual item. If I pay for something, I should be able to do whatever the fuck I want with it. I should be able to resell my instance of it, without limits. I should be able to use it in perpetuity. I should be able to repair without hinderance if I have the smarts to. If it is a software product, the provider of the operating system (Apple, this means you) shouldn't be able to make it disappear at a whim. If it's media (books, audio, video), it should never be subject to modification or censorship after purchase (Amazon, this means you).

Big business made this bed, and they'll have to lie in it. Again: I don't pirate. I don't condone piracy.

...but I completely understand how piracy became mainstream.
the business world created this situation by nibbling away at the concept of ownership. Paying for a "license" to something isn't the same as paying for the actual item. If I pay for something, I should be able to do whatever the fuck I want with it.

BINGO!!!!!
 
I don't pirate. I don't condone piracy.

That said, the business world created this situation by nibbling away at the concept of ownership. Paying for a "license" to something isn't the same as paying for the actual item. If I pay for something, I should be able to do whatever the fuck I want with it. I should be able to resell my instance of it, without limits. I should be able to use it in perpetuity. I should be able to repair without hinderance if I have the smarts to. If it is a software product, the provider of the operating system (Apple, this means you) shouldn't be able to make it disappear at a whim. If it's media (books, audio, video), it should never be subject to modification or censorship after purchase (Amazon, this means you).

Big business made this bed, and they'll have to lie in it. Again: I don't pirate. I don't condone piracy.

...but I completely understand how piracy became mainstream.

I agree with some of your points, but there's something that doesn't really ring true for me. For example, how does Amazon changing the words "fatty boom boom" in a Roald Dahl book, connect in any way to some Russian guy cracking and uploading hacked drum software?

Paying for software licenses - rather than the software itself - has always been with us, since before the internet even.

Perpetuity == unrealistic. Let's say you buy a copy of BFD1 in 2004.... are you being reasonable in thinking you should be able to use it in 2026? I would argue that is quite an unrealistic expectation.

You should not be able to "repair" without hinderance if that involves hacking the binaries or plugin resources, and fiddling with the compiled code.

I agree that once you've paid for a thing, you shouldn't be able to lose it. But I don't agree that it should never be subject to modification; that would completely scupper software update possibilities; CPU usage improvements and the like. It also prevents your ambition of being able to use it in perpetuity.

I just don't think it is as cut and dry as your nicely crafted paragraph would imply.
 
Well, it's the distinction between a paying for product and paying for a service. With the fast pace technology is evolving now, along with consumer demands for ongoing updates and new features, many companies are looking as their software as services, since it's not a "one and done" manufacturing process, there is a need of round the clock development, and the license/subscription model is more conducive to that when it comes to a constant revenue stream to support ongoing work.

So some companies work strictly with products, where you buy something (usually hardware) and get a complete product and updates are done only sporadically for things like bug fixes and major firmware revisions, other companies do subscription/licenses and are constantly adding features (weekly/monthly etc). And of course, many companies use a hybrid model between the two.


As for changing content on media, that always existed, many books would go through a 2nd or 3rd edition with revisions. The only difference is back then, that was no way to send you/remove pages, so you had to buy the new edition. Digital technology only made it possible for these revisions to be done in real-time, but a book/record revision is not a new concept at all.


The concept of ownership is alive and well, however, not everything will fit in that category. And a lot of it is driven by consumer expectations of constant updates/additions, especially in the digital realm.
 
I just don't think it is as cut and dry as your nicely crafted paragraph would imply.

Nothing ever is. I'm not defending the theft of intellectual property. I'm saying that a series of bad decisions, prompted by a desire for control and higher revenue, has greatly increased piracy and provided defensible moral cover for those who engage in it.

Putting chips in ink cartridges to prevent people from using their own ink?! I should be able to use any ink cartridge that fits and fill it with anything I want. If I want to print with a frothy mixture of yak piss and tomato soup, that should be up to me.

Chipping farm equipment so you have to call the manufacturers service department (whether they have the capacity to take care of you or not) to get your equipment running. C'mon!

It's not any one thing. It's an intolerable environment....and I could go on for hours (but I won't :ROFLMAO: )
 
Back
Top